+1 on both counts. I strongly agree we
should choose one regex and choosing the same as NAPTR makes sense.
You've got the pen on Working Draft 10. Do
you want to go ahead and start making these edits?
=Drummond
From: Wachob, Gabe
[mailto:gwachob@visa.com]
Sent: Monday, November 14, 2005 10:27 AM
To: Tan, William;
xri@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [xri] XRI Resolution
2.0 Draft 09 comments
1. xrd:XRD/xrd:Service/xrd:Pattern – what flavor of
regular expression should the value be (perl-compatible, posix, etc.)? Is the
full power of regexp really required, why not just simple string comparison or
prefix matching?
My suggestion is that we use the regex
used in NAPTR (RFC 3402 and 3403) - this is basically posix regular
expression and is broadly supported and is mostly a "greatest common
denominator" syntax. I think the NAPTR/DDDS people had the same issue in
deciding a regex syntax and chose wisely.
4. Section 2.8 Versioning - if the version attribute is
optional, implementations may take the shortcut to ignore its presence thereby
defeating the purpose of versioning. A newer version may not change the schema
but we may want the possibility of modifying the semantics of the elements or
attributes. We may not have that choice should implementations do not respect
version information.
The idea here is that lack of a
version attribute means "2.0" (where we are today). *Any*
processor would have to make that assumption. I think you are arguing that by
making it required, you force implementers to implement parsing of this
attribute from day one. Thats fine with me.
-Gabe